Explanation:

- Section 13 of the CPC refers to the conclusiveness of foreign judgments, stating that a foreign judgment shall be conclusive between the parties as to any matter directly adjudicated upon between the same parties, except in cases outlined in the section.

- The word “transaction” in Section 13 relates to the subject matter or deal that was adjudicated in the former judgment.

- A former judgment, by itself, is not a transaction but the record of what was decided in a transaction.

- Therefore, the former judgment cannot be a "transaction" under Section 13; it is the result of a transaction, not the transaction itself.

Option 1: Yes.

- Implies former judgment can operate as a transaction. This is not correct.

Option 2: No.

- Correct. A former judgment is not a transaction.

Option 3: It may be a transaction u/s. 13

- Incorrect. A former judgment cannot “be” a transaction, regardless of circumstances.

Option 4: None of the above

- Not correct, since option 2 is the right answer.

Option:2, No.